Spectrum management has traditionally been about the use of technical criteria developed through long-winded compatibility studies to determine what can (and can not) be allowed access without causing harmful interference to other users. Increasingly, however, regulators are using forward looking market-based spectrum management techniques such as administrative incentive pricing, auctions and comparative selection (beauty parades), trading and property rights in order to be able to adapt to the rapidly changing and liberalised markets which use the radio spectrum.

Mssrs. Cave, Webb and Doyle have documented the current state of play in these forward looking techniques (often lumped together under the banner of 'Spectrum Pricing') in their new publication Essentials of Modern Spectrum Management. They describe developments in both the technical and economic tools used to manage the radio spectrum as well as looking at other related issues such as the need for and benefits of spectrum commons. There's also a good discussion of why Ultra Wide Band (UWB) has made many regulators reflect on whether existing spectrum management techniques are appropriate or have sufficient longevity and flexibility to cope with such new approaches to spectrum use.

The book uses a number of international case studies together with the practical experience of the authors to illustrate many of the concepts involved. Whilst the book would not be suitable for someone wishing to gain an overall understanding of spectrum management, it provides a useful and inciteful reference on these more advanced techniques and would suit anyone who has experience of spectrum regulation and who wanted to understand better how such regulation is being transformed to encourage more efficient spectrum use. Certainly a book that should be on the shelves of any self-respecting modern spectrum manager!

Years ago I used to know the frequency¹ for the downlink of Capital Radio in London's 'Flying Eye', the aircraft used to scout about for travel blackspots. It was a useful frequency to have as there was no better place to get the latest travel news. I also remembered that there was an uplink from the studio on around 455 MHz too.

One quiet afternoon I thought I'd have a tune around to see whether or not the old up and downlink frequencies were still active. Listening around 467 MHz, there seemed to be no sign of the downlink (though being around 25 miles outside of central London and with a downlink power of less than a Watt, this wasn't perhaps, that surprising). The uplink, however, is still active on 455.075 MHz.

What was rather odd, however, was to hear dozens of Imam's calling their congregation to prayer on frequencies just below this at around 454.5 MHz. Was this some freak long-distance propagation carrying signals from arabic speaking countries in North Africa or the Middle East? Was it a freak spurious response on my receiver, allowing reception of, perhaps, satellite radio? Were these the link frequencies to the numerous 'Radio Ramadan' stations that appear on the FM band during the festival?

No. It was none of these. Instead it seems that there is a radio service, established in around 2000, called 'On-Site Religious Observation' or OSRO. This a a licensed radio service which allows any religious body to use the old Wide Area Paging (WAP) channels to deliver voice communications to pagers. What a good use for these otherwise quiet channels: to allow Muslim's their right to hear the Imam's call without the need to build noisy minarets, just build unsightly radio towers instead!

A bit more digging revealed that there are all sorts of interesting frequencies in the range 454 to 458 MHz as listed below:

With Ofcom considering reconsidering its previously aborted plans to re-align the band it will be interesting to see where these services end up. And in the meantime if anyone has the frequency used for the Flying Eye's downlink, do share it with us!

¹467.6625 MHz if I remember correctly.²Radio system used by Network Rail in areas where rail services have no conductor and thus the driver can not leave the cab to commnunicate with the signaller.³Links and talkback for radio stations, TV studios, film sets, theatres and so on. Could be used by production team at a Kylie Minogue concert for example...

Wireless Waffle isn't one of a kind. There's another Wireless Waffle on the web. Whilst I claim no originality for the title of this blog, it does irk me that the man who runs the other Wireless Waffle is so upset that I accidentally stumbled across the same name as him that he feels the need to take a poke at this site on many occasions.

When I first launched this site, Keith, who runs the other Wireless Waffle, contacted me with a nice e-mail and suggested that we exchange links. I put up a link to his site with a nice button that I took time to make myself (see right) but when a reciprocal link failed to materialise on his site I took it down, and thought nothing more of it. But putting 'Wireless Waffle' into Google, I recently noted that the <title> of his site has been changed to:

Wireless Waffle - A fine radio site not the blog copying its title

If that's not enough, the description of his site says:

Wireless waffle is a specialist radio site ... it is not to be confused with the blog which is using the same title - this other site is more technical and whilst we do not have the copyright on the word waffle they could have thought of a different title...

Fair enough, I could have thought of a different title, but I didn't, but neither did I specifically pick the name on purpose to upset anyone. I was not aware of Mr. Knight's site until he sent me an e-mail.

But the rhetoric doesn't stop there. In a post he made on his site on 16 September he says,

I am wondering if you would miss the Wireless Waffle site if I decided to close it? ... There is another site, a blog, which insists on calling itself Wireless Waffle which is far more technical than this. The chap who publishes this has pictures of ladies in various poses and states of undress. I am one of those that favours proper websites rather than blogs. Blogs do not demand any knowledge of html and that is part of the fun of operating a site.

Now this is just downright misleading, and in some cases completely wrong. He is insinuating that:

* My use of the occasional saucy picture demeans the content on this site. There are many pictures of men in various states of dress as well as women and anyway this kind of thing has been adorining British seaside postcards for many years. These pictures, with their associated captions are intended to add some levity to what can be rather colourless topics.

* That my use of 'blog' software to publish the articles I write devalues them. I use blog software as it makes presentation look nice and it's easier to find articles and for people to browse around.

* That I know nothing about HTML. This couldn't be further from the truth. Take a look at the other content on the host site for Wireless Waffle, such as my Javascript tools, or my Random Town Name Generator. All of these are written by me, using nothing more than a text editor, and most pages are in XHTML which is notoriously more difficult to write in than HTML. If you're going to level that kind of accusation at someone, at least make sure your own site is valid HTML!

The most serious accusation is that by starting this site, I have damaged the viewership of his site to the extent that he is, in essence, accusing me of forcing him to close his site down.

The reaction of many people to so many unfounded accusations might be to retaliate, but I'm not that kind of person. Mr. Knight's site is an interesting read with content that most of the readers of this site would no doubt find of passing or of direct interest. I suggest you take a visit (click on the button above) and have a look around. And pop back here afterwards and leave a comment on this post to let me know what you think.

OK, so it's not as snappy as 'spot the ball' but the idea is the same. Look at the picture below and see if you can spot the HF antenna. Clue: Look for the 'x's.

A bit silly perhaps, but the thing of interest is that this building is the Admiralty Building as seen from Horseguards Parade in Central London and that those really are HF antennas (see the expanded picture below). Whilst it's easy to dismiss good old fashioned short wave communications as outdated, especially in the age of satellites and mobile phones, it's very satisfying to see that those who need some assuredness of communication think it worthwhile to defile historic buildings in the centre of an area of tranquility and beauty with whopping great big, ugly HF aerials.

It doesn't necessarily follow, but it might be fair to presume that the people who did this (let's call them the 'military' for want of a better word) will be keen to ensure continued, low-interference access, to HF spectrum for some time to come. Which has to be good news for short-wave listeners and radio amateurs alike.